@tour2ma said:

Trent Dilfer just unveiled an really interesting take on NFL Live.

Basically he said that for months he had been breaking down tape in vain trying to find a way to predict successful college QB translation to the NFL. He said the compounded effects of the wider college hash marks, the spread, the read option and tempo have turned college QBs into throwers. Evaluating the bulk of their play was a waste of time. The exception was goal-to-goal situations against the most talented teams.

In goal-to-goal situations field compression neutralized field, scheme and tempo differences enough to evaluate pro readiness. He offered these breakdowns vs. Power 5 opponents for Winston, Luck, Wilson, Mariotta, Griffith and Manziel.

- QB --- JW - AL - RW - MM - RG - JM

%Cmplt: 64 - 85 - 100 - 44 -- 30 -- 40

TD/INT : 9-0 15-0 9-0 -- 9-0 - 3-1 - 5-2

RushTD: 2 --- 1 --- 4 ---- 5 ---- 6 ---- 6

@tiamat63 said:

if by average you mean below average then yes... yes indeed.

@mkmd said:

Well DUH he's from a pro-style college offense, EVERYONE knows that's how you evaluate if a QB has it or not.

Just look at Jake Locker, Mettenberger, Mallet, Mccoy, Weeden, Ponder, Manuel, Glennon, Barkley.... all of them are your ideal candidates for any team looking for a QB who can transition into a pro-style offense....

Mettenberger, Mallet, McCoy and even Glennon have shown the potential to at least be average starting QB's in the NFL in the right setting with the right personnel.

@opal312 said:

Well DUH he's from a pro-style college offense, EVERYONE knows that's how you evaluate if a QB has it or not.

Just look at Jake Locker, Mettenberger, Mallet, Mccoy, Weeden, Ponder, Manuel, Glennon, Barkley.... all of them are your ideal candidates for any team looking for a QB who can transition into a pro-style offense....

@jrb12711 said:

no

Wrong

Wrong

Wrong

Don't evaluate him on his numbers in the Spread-offense.

Look at his throws.

His pocket awareness.

His physical traits.

His skill set

His CHARACTER...

There are very little QB coming out of college in a spread offense like him. Just because Manzil fail coming from a school with a spread offense, does not mean Mariota will fail too. That logic is fail.

@tiamat63 said:

Yeah a little messed up there. What I'm saying look at the crop of "old" high level starters: Brees, both Manning's, Brady, Rodgers. Compare that to the group of "young" high level starters: Luck, Wilson, Matt Ryan. All these dudes didn't come from an Oregon type of spread offense.

@mkmd said:

You also have far more pro-style offense based quarterbacks coming into the NFL, guess what percentage of those players aren't successful starting QBs? Writing him off because he plays in a spread is just hilarious to me.That's like me saying, 90% of drafted quarterbacks coming from pro-style offenses in college aren't successful at the next level which is probably a lower percentage than reality. In the last five years about 8 or 9 out of 10 of the top drafted QBs are from pro-style offenses. How many worked out? 5-7 total? Less? Then you have the dual threat spread QBs, Cam, Russell Wilson, kaepernick, RG3, tannehill, dalton all of whom have had success to some extent coming from spread based offenses.

Shouldn't these QBs be doing well because of where they are from? Mike Glennon, EJ manuel, Matt barkley Landry Jones, Tyler Wilson,Weeden, Osweiler, Foles, Cousins, Locker, Ponder,Mccoy, Clausen and MANY MANY more. You flood enough pro-style based QBs into the league of course you will find a gem every once in a while. give me a break, every player has different skill sets and abilities SPREAD or NOT.

Jesus where do I even start with that? Of course that's true, any moron could babble with that logic. The fact you would include RG3, Dalton and Kap in the conversation says it allRussell Wilson played in hybrid scheme that had a lot of pro-style at NC State and Wisconsin. Of course most guys are going to fail, that's the NFL and true of every position on the field. That's why only extremely small amounts of college players even get drafted in the first place. To not look at empirical evidence of what brings out good players is laughably bad. Being able to run means nothing-we have that guy on the roster now.

@jrb12711 said:

You also have far more pro-style offense based quarterbacks coming into the NFL, guess what percentage of those players aren't successful starting QBs? Writing him off because he plays in a spread is just hilarious to me.That's like me saying, 90% of drafted quarterbacks coming from pro-style offenses in college aren't successful at the next level which is probably a lower percentage than reality. In the last five years about 8 or 9 out of 10 of the top drafted QBs are from pro-style offenses. How many worked out? 5-7 total? Less? Then you have the dual threat spread QBs, Cam, Russell Wilson, kaepernick, RG3, tannehill, dalton all of whom have had success to some extent coming from spread based offenses.

Shouldn't these QBs be doing well because of where they are from? Mike Glennon, EJ manuel, Matt barkley Landry Jones, Tyler Wilson,Weeden, Osweiler, Foles, Cousins, Locker, Ponder,Mccoy, Clausen and MANY MANY more. You flood enough pro-style based QBs into the league of course you will find a gem every once in a while. You want to talk about expectations and forget just how many QBs fail from ideal pro-style offenses. give me a break, every player has different skill sets and abilities SPREAD or NOT.

@jrb12711 said:

Not sure exactly what you're attempting to say here. Cam Newton is an elite player?

Anywho, when you look at this list and think over the elite people in the game, only Cam Newton really doesn't fit the mold of the player that came from a more pro-style offense in college. Mariota came from the most true-spread scheme in the entire CFB landscape. Do I think he has tools to be successful at some level? Sure, but how many times are these QB's who come from spread schemes going to not live up to expectations before it becomes a pattern?

@tour2ma said:

HA!!

6:15 and counting... down...

@tour2ma said:

thanks capt. obvious.

geez.

tickf lippin tock.

@mkmd said:

So tebow is a fair comparison to mariota because they both played in a spread with good stats? That's some spot on analysis where do I buy the insider subscription. Tebow and mariota are nothing alike, please stop. you don't want stats and my opinion is invalid but your opinion is valid? that makes sense. you only watch 4 bad passes and come to some conclusion about what type of throws he can and can't make and you know exactly how well he will transition to the NFL. surprise, you don't know and I don't know how well he will transition. Will he have things to develop and learn, of course. But saying he is inaccurate is laughable, he's displayed he can go through progressions and deliver passes accurately for three years in college and at pro day. He was the most consistent QB in college the last 3 years. Here is an opinion, I think gruden said it best lack of information is an understatement.

I dont know anybody in this draft that can do for a football team what Mariota can do, Gruden said. He can read the field. That whole thing about Oregon being a no-huddle, dive-option team, that is just a narrative resulting from a lack of information. The Ducks run a lot of pro-style concepts. Mariota does a lot with the protections. Ive seen him throw the ball with touch and timing in tight windows. The former Bucs coach points out that Mariota is the same size as Jameis Winston but runs 4.52 forty. He is incredibly elusive, and man, is he a playmaker and a great competitor. I see him functioning in the pocket, out of the pocket, and if you want to run a zone-read, hell rip the defense apart. He is like Russell Wilson, only he is 6-4.

does gruden

have zero credibility too?

@miktoxic said:

a lot of people here ( i know a couple) who are bellowing at the chance the browns make a move on mariota were all too convinced manziel was the best QB in the draft last year, lol.

Big difference between "a lot" and "a couple"...

@tiamat63 said:

I don't expect Mariota to be quite as bad. Franchise worthy? We'll have to agree to disagree.

I'm actually kind of curious what you see in him that would convince you of that label...

I did not think my 10 to 20 appraisal was all that lofty.

Just a growing feeling that he is going to develop and be a consistently good, reliable QB for 10-15 years. I think his legs will buy him the time to develop, much as Wilson's have for him.

While I do have concerns over is lack of fire, I have zero concern that any leading he does will be in the right direction from the get-go.

I'm very confident on Mariota being a star.

The same level of confidence that i believe Manziel will be a bust last year.

@tiamat63 said:

Size, speed, arm strength, decision making and intangibles are all strengths. Now many will say the offense dictates his decision making but then you get into the "chicken or the egg" discussion. I wouldn't trade #12 and #19 for him not because of his lack of ability but the Browns need identity and stability and that would bring neither.

@tour2ma said:

I don't expect Mariota to be quite as bad. Franchise worthy? We'll have to agree to disagree.

I'm actually kind of curious what you see in him that would convince you of that label...

I'm just saying they won't even be close. MM looks like a franchise QB to me... one of those #10 to 20 QBs you can compete with for years to come. Is that worth 2 #1's or more? Different question... one to which I'd say no, but it's a very close call.

@tour2ma said:

I don't believe Mariota is the next Tebow per say'. However the same knocks on Tebow when coming out (system, delivery, reads) are quite similar to those you hear on Mariota. Their are comparable traits in their games that are concerning. That's my point.

I would also add that Mariotta is not Tebow 2.0.

@mkmd said:

At this point you have to be a fucking troll because YOU started the stats argument in favor of Mariota. I then pointed out Tebow played in a similar system with very similar numbers. Then you come back with weak shit about chuckie's opinion. While the guy is a fine coach, he's not really a great talent evaluator, that's for damn certain.

I don't want one set of near bullshit stats that prove nothing, otherwise every fucking QB in a Mike Leech system is the next Manning using that metric.

As for T-biscuit and Super Mario -How they rate in comparable playing abilities? Well, they are more alike then not. Both struggle to come off of their first reads, anticipate throws or open windows in which they deliver late passes. Both had/have a tendency to have spurts of inaccuracy down the field on top of spraying the ball against zone coverage. Now, their mechanics may be different, Mariota's release is no where near as exaggerated or windmill as Tim's but their foowork goes to hell in a hurry when things break down.

I personally have watched quite a bit of Mariota. It's what I do, I love football, I play football, I watch football. I absorb what I see, process it and come out with a conclusion. So unless you are paid scout, service runner, Oregon coach or a member of an NFL front office, I'll bet the farm I've watched more tape on Marcus than you have.

Fuck me, I fell asleep last night watching the Stanford/Oregon game from the previous year. That is my passion for this game and my thirst to understand its players.

And if the Chuckie quote you're giving is from Gruden's QB camp, please.... tell me where he's said ONE bad thing about any QB yet in contrast giving wild comparison's to players that come on his show. You think players would agree season after season to participate if they feel they may be eviscerated because their talent level (or lack of) and thus affecting draft stock?

Troll better, come up with a better argument or see yourself the fuck out of this conversation.